Knight before dice, or dice before knight?

[Cos-]

When I have a knight card and there's a robber on one of my hexes, it's good to play the knight _before_ rolling the dice, so if that number gets rolled, I get the resource.

However, if I already have 7 resource cards at the start of the turn, I often wait to play the knight and roll dice first, because if I play the knight first I'll get 8 resources and then if I roll a 7, I'll lose 4. If I wait and play the knight second, odds are higher that I'll a) not roll the number that the robber is on, so lose nothing, and then b) get an extra resource with the robber.

But what about the odds if the robber is currently on my 8 or 6? What if it's on an 8 or 6 where I have two settlements or a city? It seems like the best choice in this case may be to play the knight before rolling dice, but choose not to rob anyone, so I still have 7 and don't lose if I roll a 7. But then I lose the extra resource I could've gotten from the robber. Also, at least on BGA, you may be forced to place the robber on a space that doesn't block much for other players, because BGA's Catan doesn't let you choose not to steal if you can steal.

What do you think?

[Fromper]

7 is statistically more likely to roll than 6 or 8. I almost always wait until after rolling to play the knight when I have 7 cards.

The only exception is if the 7 cards you have aren't particularly useful, but the resource you could get that's covered by the robber is crucial for you. Then, I might risk it. For instance, if you have 7 ore in hand, but no wheat, and the blocked hex is your only wheat spot, which gives you 2 of them when rolled. Losing 4 ore from rolling the 7 wouldn't matter, since you can't use that many anyway, but getting the 2 wheat would give you a city instantly. In that case, it's worth the risk.

[Mathew5000]

But what about the odds if the robber is currently on my 8 or 6? What if it's on an 8 or 6 where I have two settlements or a city? It seems like the best choice in this case may be to play the knight before rolling dice, but choose not to rob anyone, so I still have 7 and don't lose if I roll a 7. But then I lose the extra resource I could've gotten from the robber. Also, at least on BGA, you may be forced to place the robber on a space that doesn't block much for other players, because BGA's Catan doesn't let you choose not to steal if you can steal.

I think it's way too conservative to place the robber on the desert so that you aren't forced to steal. That will rarely be the best play.

In general, if the robber is on a 6 where you have 2 settlements, and you're contemplating moving it to an 8 where your main opponent has 2 settlements, and you have exactly 7 resources, then you should wait until after rolling the dice. The main exception is the one pointed out by Fromper, where the resources you stand to gain are much more valuable to you than what you stand to lose if sevened. You can come up with other exceptions too, such as if you think your opponent just needs one more ore to win the game, then of course block your opponent's ore even at the risk of you getting sevened.

There are various other factors to consider, such as the possibility of your opponent getting sevened.

By the way, do the official rules say you must steal if possible when you move the robber? Or (at a real-world physical Catan tournament, for example) do I have the option to play the knight and use the robber to block but forego stealing? If the official rules allow the latter, then I guess this is a bug in BGA's implementation.

[Mathew5000]

By the way, do the official rules say you must steal if possible when you move the robber? Or (at a real-world physical Catan tournament, for example) do I have the option to play the knight and use the robber to block but forego stealing? If the official rules allow the latter, then I guess this is a bug in BGA's implementation.

Well, looking at the official rules (https://www.catan.com/understand-catan/game-rules) I'd conclude that if you play the knight and move the robber to a hex where all opponents who have settlements or cities have at least one resource, then you must steal a resource. Therefore I'd say that BGA's implementation is correct.



(If one of your opponents has no resources, you can move the robber to a hex where that player and another opponent who does have resources both have settlements, and then you can opt not to steal by choosing the resourceless player as your victim.)

[Cos-]

(If one of your opponents has no resources, you can move the robber to a hex where that player and another opponent who does have resources both have settlements, and then you can opt not to steal by choosing the resourceless player as your victim.)

Interesting! I don't think I had noticed that subtlety in the rules before.

"If there are 2 or more such players, you may choose your victim."
"The player you elect to rob ... If that player has no cards, you get nothing."

So, yes, it does sound like you're allowed to deliberately choose the player that you know has no resources.

If you have this option in the situation I described, how likely are you to use it? That is, you can move the robber before you roll the dice, block another player and unblock yourself, but not collect a resource to put yourself over 7.

[SilkySapper]

I prefer to roll then play knight in most circumstances, the one time I do it opposite is if an opponent has a good numbered tile with multiple settlements that I know they need that resource or have a 2:1 port on.

The reason I roll then play knight is, if my opponents don't have a lot of resources, I can see if they get any resources that I want/need on my roll and then know I have a good chance to get the resource I want by playing the knight on the one who received that resource. To me, that outweighs moving the robber off my resource and hoping it rolls that one number.